A randomized trial of excision versus ablation for mild endometriosis

Wright J, Jeremy Wright, Lotfallah H, Hany Lotfallah, Kevin Jones, Jones K, Lovell D, David Lovell
Fertility and sterility · 2005 · vol. 83(6) , pp. 1830–1836 · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.11.066 · PMID:15950657 · W1966466370
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 79 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This randomized trial compared the outcomes of surgical excision versus ablation for treating mild endometriosis.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare excisional and ablative treatment modalities for mild (revised American Fertility score 1-2) endometriosis in the management of chronic pelvic pain.DesignA randomized study of excision or ablation for mild endometriosis, participants and investigators alike blinded to the treatment modality at the follow-up visit.SettingDistrict general hospital with a specialist pelvic pain clinic in the United Kingdom.Patient(s)Women presenting with chronic pelvic pain.Intervention(s)Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire detailing symptoms related to chronic pelvic pain and rating their pain on a ranked ordinal scale. Areas of pelvic tenderness were identified and similarly ranked. At laparoscopy they were randomly assigned to excision or ablation of any endometriotic lesions, and the questionnaire was repeated at 6 months.Main outcome measure(s)Changes in pain score on a ranked ordinal scale after surgical treatment for mild endometriosis.Result(s)Both treatment modalities produced good symptomatic relief and reduction of pelvic tenderness (67%). There was no difference in morbidity; one woman in each group became pregnant during the study period. Only two participants reported no relief or a worsening of symptoms or signs.Conclusion(s)This small study showed good symptom relief at 6 months from pelvic pain for the majority of participants irrespective of the treatment modality, but two participants did not improve or got worse. A high pain score before treatment was a predictor of appreciable improvement. Further work is needed to identify women in whom surgical intervention is likely to produce a good response.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosischronic_pelvic_pain

MeSH descriptors

Electrocoagulation Electrocoagulation Electrocoagulation Endometriosis Pelvic Pain Catheter Ablation Catheter Ablation Catheter Ablation Double-Blind Method Endometriosis Endometriosis Female Humans Pelvic Pain Pelvic Pain Principal Component Analysis Statistics, Nonparametric

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (16)

Cited by (50)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-07-26T06:08:39.051465+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:15:35.797702+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK